1

Evidence and Argument Paper Guide 2019-20

Evidence and Argument is a bridge paper for first-year History and Politics students which is designed to provide an introduction to key concepts, approaches, and methods from across the two disciplines. Both the History Faculty and the Department of Politics and International Studies at Cambridge are unusually broad and eclectic in their interests and approaches. In History, interests range from the traditional realm of ‘high’ politics to social and cultural history, the history of political thought, and the use of quantitative data to reconstruct economic and demographic changes which stretch across decades or even centuries. Some Politics lecturers see themselves as ‘political scientists’, developing theories and models which seek to explain processes of political change, whilst others eschew social science and focus on understanding the meanings and intentions of political actors. Why do these disciplinary choices matter? How do they shape the kinds of evidence we use and the arguments we construct? Evidence and Argument explores these questions through seven case studies based on original sources and ongoing research projects in Cambridge. It is examined through a Long Essay of 3,000-4,000 words and a 1.5-hour written paper. This paper guide provides a core reading list for the Evidence and Argument classes and Long Essay and should be read in conjunction with the Moodle site, which contains PDF copies of most of the primary sources and some of the secondary readings. You should also refer to the handouts and reading lists provided by your lecturers when preparing for the written exam. Further information on the written exam will be circulated in Lent Term. If you have any questions, please contact the course director, Dr Peter Sloman, by email (pjs93@cam.ac.uk) or in person. Dr Sloman will be available to meet with students each Monday from 11am-noon in Alison Richard Building room 108 – no appointment necessary. Teaching arrangements Evidence and Argument is taught through eight classes spread across Michaelmas Term and Lent Term, together with a series of core lectures (8 of which are shared with the Historical Argument and Practice taken by History students). Each student will receive a half-hour supervision in Lent Term to provide advice on the Long Essay, and there will also be revision classes and supervisions in Easter Term to help students prepare for the written exam. Lectures Introductory lectures (Dr Peter Sloman) Wednesday 9 October at 11.45am – Room 6, History Faculty – Brief introductory session Monday 14 October at 2pm – Room 6, History Faculty – Evidence and Argument explained Monday 24 February at 3pm – SG1, Alison Richard Building – Writing the long essay Monday 9 March at 3pm – SG1, Alison Richard Building – Preparing for the E&A exam

2

Introduction to Historiography (shared with Historical Argument and Practice) Michaelmas Term – Thursdays at 2pm Room LG19, Faculty of Law unless otherwise stated 10 October – Who does History? (Prof. John Arnold) [different venue: LG18] 17 October – Classical Histories (Dr Rebecca Flemming) 24 October – Pre-Modern Histories (Prof. John Arnold) 31 October – The Cornucopia of Enlightenment Histories (Miss Sylvana Tomaselli) 7 November – Empires Write Back (Dr Hank Gonzales) 14 November – Panel discussion: Periodization (Dr Hank Gonzalez et al) 21 November – Cultural History (Dr Helen McCarthy) 28 November – Marxist History (Dr Hank Gonzales) Writing History Michaelmas Term – Mondays at 2pm Room 6, History Faculty 21 October – Political History (Dr Nicki Kindersley) 28 October – no lecture 4 November – Economic History (Prof. Gareth Austin) 11 November – International and Transnational History (Prof. Andrew Preston) 18 November – States and Empires (Prof. Brendan Simms) 25 November – History of Political Thought (TBC) 2 December – no lecture Approaches to Politics Lent Term – Thursdays at 2pm and Mondays at 3pm, SG1, Alison Richard Building 16 January – Studying Politics: Foundational Choices (Dr Peter Sloman) 20 January – Evidence and Sources in Politics (Dr Peter Sloman and others) 23 January – Comparative Politics (Dr Peter Sloman) 27 January – Political Sociology (Dr Peter Sloman) 30 January – Rational Choice (Dr Peter Sloman) 3 February – Institutionalism (Dr Peter Sloman) 6 February – Public Policy (Dr Dennis Grube) 10 February – Approaches to International Relations (Dr Daniel Larsen) 13 February – Thinking about Power (Prof. Duncan Bell) [different venue: SG2] 17 February – Interpretivism (Dr Iza Hussin) Classes Class 1. How to think with sources Class 2. Using Archives and Manuscript Sources: British Education and the Politics of Comprehensivization, c. 1960-79 Class 3. Comparative History: Varieties of Nationalism in Asia and Africa Class 4. Using Visual Sources: Political Cartoons Class 5. Using Quantitative Sources: Occupational Structure and the Industrial Revolution Class 6. Studying Political Behaviour: Voting in UK General Elections Class 7. Studying Political Institutions: Sociology, Public Policy, and Political Change Class 8. Texts in Time: Studying the History of Political Thought

3

Preparing for classes Evidence and Argument is taught through lectures and classes, which provide an opportunity for students to discuss scholarly issues in a larger group than supervisions and to develop their oral presentation skills. Students will be assigned to class groups at the start of Michaelmas Term. If you need to switch groups because of an unavoidable clash with other lectures or classes, please speak to Dr Sloman. Your class leader will assign presentation topics at the start of the year. You should expect to spend an average of 12 hours preparing for each class, though this may vary over the course of the year. In particular, you may wish to spend more time preparing than usual when you are giving a presentation, and correspondingly less time (say, 8-10 hours) preparing for the other classes. An effective oral presentation should introduce the topic as clearly as possible, outline the main intellectual issues involved and explain which arguments you have found most convincing. You should draw on the prescribed texts and sources (which might be manuscripts, cartoons, data, or secondary literature) and explain why they are relevant to the question. You may wish to use Powerpoint to support your argument and provide illustrative material, though it is perfectly possible to give a good presentation without using slides. The post-graduate teaching assistant will provide informal feedback to help you develop your presentation skills. When you are not presenting, you should prepare to participate in class discussion by reading the key texts (especially those marked with an asterisk) and primary sources (where relevant) and thinking about how you might answer the discussion questions. Although class participation is not graded at Cambridge, those who participate actively in class discussion usually learn more and so perform better in long essays and examinations. Learning objectives On completing the course,

i. Students should understand the different methods and approaches used in the study

of History and Politics at Cambridge, and should be able to reflect on the theoretical and practical implications of these choices.

ii. Students should be familiar with some of the forms of evidence used by historians and political scientists, and should be able to analyse written, oral, visual, and statistical sources.

iii. Students should be able to construct clear and well-founded arguments and to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of arguments made by others.

4

Assessment

Evidence and Argument will be assessed in two ways:

i. A Long Essay of up to 4,000 words (50%). A list of six questions will be issued to students at the division of Lent Term, and the deadline for submission will be Thursday of the third week of Easter Term (9 May 2019), at noon. The Long Essay questions will be closely related to the topics studied in class. There will be one question on each of the following six topics: archives and manuscript sources (the 1984-5 miners’ strike), visual sources (political cartoons), comparative history (nations and nationalism), quantitative sources (measuring industrialization), political behaviour (UK general elections), and texts in time (Thomas Hobbes and Leviathan).

The Long Essay should be formatted according to the History Faculty Style Guide, available online at https://www.hist.cam.ac.uk/undergraduate/hist-tripos/info-all-years/style-guide, and students should submit two copies to the History and Politics Administrator in the History Faculty Office by the deadline. A digital copy is also required: information about how to submit this will be circulated nearer the time.

ii. A 1½-hour written examination (50%), in which candidates must answer one

question from a list of no fewer than ten. The examination questions will draw on material from the lectures as well as the classes, and will ask candidates to reflect on the theoretical and methodological issues involved in the study of History and Politics.

Further information about both the Long Essay and the written examination will be provided in Lent Term. The style of questions is likely to be similar to those asked in 2017-18 and 2018-19, which are listed below, though some of the topics have changed. 2017-18 Long Essay questions 1. Why did the 1984-5 miners’ strike fail? 2. Has the nature and purpose of political cartoons changed between the eighteenth century

and the twenty-first century? 3. ‘Historical information on men and women's work has the potential to revolutionise our

understanding of the process of industrialisation.’ Discuss. 4. How can the writings of nationalist leaders help us understand the differences between

their respective forms of nationalism? 5. How can theories of voting behaviour help us understand the outcome of the 2017 United

Kingdom general election? 6. ‘Political philosophy is dead’ [PETER LASLETT, 1956]. Discuss. 2018-19 Long Essay questions 1. What are the strengths and limitations of archival sources for understanding the 1984-5

miners’ strike? 2. ‘Political cartoons function as a key indicator of the democratic health of a polity. They

are a barometer of press freedom, of government tolerance of free speech and critical thought, and of resistance to dominant power relations’ [DANIEL HAMMETT]. Discuss.

5

3. How far was twentieth-century nationalism in Asia and Africa based on a shared critique of imperialism? Answer with reference to any two or more leaders.

4. How have historians used quantitative data on occupational structure to understand the nature and timing of England’s ‘industrial revolution’?

5. ‘Voters’ perceptions of party competence are the main determinant of electoral behaviour in contemporary Britain.’ Discuss.

6. How far should the history of the reception of a work of political thought inform our interpretation of that work?

2017-18 written exam questions 1. ‘Power is the probability that one actor within a social relationship will be in a position to

carry out his own will despite resistance’ [MAX WEBER]. Discuss. 2. How and to what extent have modern political historians transcended the limitations of a

‘high politics’ perspective? 3. Assess the value and limits for studying modern political history of any one of the

following: (a) archives, (b) images, (c) material culture, (d) oral sources. 4. How and in what ways does quantitative history enable us to answer questions which

qualitative analysis cannot? 5. ‘Historians and political scientists should stop treating the “nation state” as their main

category of analysis.’ Discuss. 6. How does analysis of gender help us understand changes in the practice of western

politics? 7. ‘Political scientists are rediscovering the importance of religion; historians have never

forgotten it.’ Discuss. 8. What lessons should historians learn from studying the social sciences? 9. Why have Marxist interpretations of the past become less popular among historians? 10. To what extent has the ‘Cambridge school’ exaggerated the importance of putting

political thinkers in historical context? 11. ‘Rational choice theory is too abstract to explain politics in the real world.’ Discuss. 12. To what extent have ‘new institutionalists’ succeeded in moving beyond a narrow focus

on formal political institutions? 13. What, if any, are the dangers of adopting a comparative method? 14. What, if anything, is gained by treating politics as a social science? 2018-19 written exam questions 1. How far has the discipline of history been fundamentally changed by the inclusion of

perspectives of those other than ‘straight, white men’? 2. ‘Cultural history can describe the past, but it cannot explain it.’ Discuss. 3. Do Marxist approaches to history leave adequate space for human agency? 4. Is economic history best distinguished from other forms of history by its subject matter,

its sources, or its approach? 5. ‘The main problem with transnational history is that it has little to say about power.’

Discuss. 6. ‘Political history is also the history of masculinity.’ Discuss. 7. ‘Political science is not about the real world but only about those features of the world

that can be studied by methods deemed to be scientific’ [BERTELL OLLMAN]. Discuss. 8. How far is rational choice theory useful for explaining political phenomena other than

election results? 9. Is political scientists’ concept of ‘path dependency’ compatible with historians’ emphasis

on ‘contingency’?

6

10. In what ways should the circumstances of the first publication of a work shape its interpretation?

11. Why are there so many competing theories of political power? 12. What is the difference between gender as a ‘sexed body’ and gender as a relation of

power? Marking criteria

i) Long Essay: All Long Essays should engage with relevant primary and/or secondary sources, as indicated by the reading list provided for the relevant class (though this need not be treated as exhaustive). Some Long Essay questions invite close study of a set of primary sources, while others ask candidates to use primary sources and/or the secondary literature to answer more thematic questions. A Long Essay may excel in a number of different ways: through an especially astute interpretation of the prescribed sources, by constructing an unusually sophisticated and focussed argument, or by combining these two approaches. All Long Essays should form a coherent whole and should show that the candidate is aware of conceptual and methodological issues. Long Essays will be assessed in terms of the following three criteria, though their application and the balance among them may differ according to the nature of the question: (i) understanding, analysis and interpretation of primary and/or secondary

sources; (ii) development of a coherent and substantial argument which illuminates

the question; (iii) effectiveness of writing and quality of presentation.

Few Long Essays will satisfy all criteria equally, but patterns characteristic of each class of degree may be identified in broad terms. Examiners should assess candidates against all three criteria in their comments books. The final mark will be a balance among them.

Candidates should follow the History Faculty Style Guide, which is available online, and should include a bibliography of relevant materials and secondary works consulted. Failure to comply with guidelines on footnoting, bibliography or style may be penalized by the examiner; in such cases, this must be stated in the examiner’s comments. In the case of serious breaches this may jeopardize the class awarded.

75-100: A Long Essay in this band will engage exceptionally closely with the

question and address its implications in a sophisticated manner. It will display an unusually effective command of a wide range of relevant material and mobilise this knowledge to good effect to develop a compelling argument. Writing will be clear, authoritative and to the point. Work in this category is likely to be original in the sense of putting forward persuasive and well-supported new ideas or making unexpected connections.

7

70-74: A Long Essay in this band will have analysed the question, understood its larger context, and developed a cogent argument based on a close engagement with the relevant primary and/or secondary sources: either the thematic issues or the sources may be foregrounded depending on the nature of the question and the approach adopted. First-class work will display understanding of the provenance, context, and meaning of sources and the relationship among them and a thorough knowledge of the relevant secondary material. The narrative will serve an overall argument which is stated clearly in the introduction and developed systematically throughout. The writing will be lucid and persuasive, and the presentation will be consistently good.

69-60: Work within this band will display a good-to-high level of

competence, and may show many of the qualities of a first class Long Essay, albeit in less sustained form. The Long Essay will be situated within an appropriate context and there will be a fair understanding of the state of knowledge and debate. The work will have an overall structure. Only the better candidates in this class are likely to reflect on the limitations of their own work. The writing will be clear and the presentation will generally be good.

50-59: Some Long Essays in this category will display all the weaknesses of

low II.i work, generally in more pronounced form. Others will have a major flaw which prevents a higher mark. The engagement with the primary sources and/or secondary literature may be limited either in scope or in the level of understanding, so that much space is filled with ‘background’. Alternatively, the study of sources may be flawed by an inability to relate the material to a wider thematic context. In either case the Long Essay will be structured by the information available rather than by the need to answer a clearly formulated question. The structure is, therefore, likely to be clumsy and either episodic – perhaps with several brief but barely-connected chapters – or dominated by breathless narrative. Large issues may go unexplored. The capacity for brief summary or self-criticism is likely to be slight. The style may be unclear, repetitious and ungainly. Factual errors, non sequiturs, self-contradictions and obvious gaps in knowledge are likely. Presentation may be careful and even pedantic, or the essay may be let down by poor typing, sporadic footnotes and an incomplete or disorganised bibliography.

40-49: A Long Essay in this category will meet the requirements of length

and presentation but have nothing of interest to say, or say it remarkably badly. This could be due to failure to examine key pieces of evidence or to inability to understand the question and construct a suitable argument in response to it. Either case might be compounded by ignorance of the general area of study and the literature about it. The Long Essay might consist of undigested primary or secondary material presented in an unstructured form and with virtually no

8

relation to an argument. Chronology might be non-existent or the argument transparently unsustainable. A Long Essay of this quality might show signs of haste or inadequate command of written English. Although these faults could co-exist with excellent presentation, there would be a strong chance of error, disorder and a lack of references and bibliography.

0-39: A Long Essay should be placed in this category if it fails to meet the

criteria for a higher mark: that is, if it fails to develop even a superficially effective response to the question.

ii) Written examination: In assessing individual answers and scripts, Examiners

and Assessors are asked to have regard to three principal criteria: (i) the extent to which the candidate has addressed the question(s) asked; (ii) the quality of the argument offered; (iii) the range of knowledge displayed.

75-100: An answer in this band will engage exceptionally closely with the

question and address its implications in a sophisticated manner. It will display an unusually effective command of a wide range of relevant material and mobilise this knowledge to good effect to develop a compelling argument. Writing will be clear, authoritative and to the point. Work in this category is likely to be original in the sense of putting forward persuasive and well-supported new ideas or making unexpected connections.

70-74: An answer in this band will engage closely and effectively with the

question, demonstrating the candidate’s ability to deal with abstract issues and develop a distinctive and persuasive argument. It will be aware of historiographical or methodological debate, but will go beyond merely paraphrasing the ideas of others to demonstrate the candidate’s own command of the relevant concepts. It should also be linguistically and structurally clear, authoritative and to the point.

60-69: An answer in this band will display a clear understanding of the

question and deploy a range of relevant evidence in answering it. The argument will be well-structured rather than emerging piecemeal or amounting merely to a list of points, but it will lack the conceptual grasp and analytical acuity of a first-class answer. Secondary literature will be used appropriately and purposefully, with an adequate awareness of its implications. Expression will be clear and capable, demonstrating a firm conceptual grasp, particularly towards the top end of the range.

50-59: An answer in this band is likely to be weakly focused on the specific

question under discussion, leaving the reader to draw out the implications of what is being said. The structure of the answer is likely to be dictated by the information available to the writer, rather than by the implications of the question, which may have been

9

overlooked or misunderstood. There may be a tendency to state ideas rather than analyse them, or the argument may rest on unsupported claims. There may be frequent indications of imperfect recollection or understanding, such as a tendency to simplify the arguments of other writers or to stumble over factual detail. Linguistically as well as structurally the presentation of ideas may be rather clumsy, with points imperfectly explained.

40-49: An answer in this band is likely to offer only a superficial or

unsustained response to the question, suggesting that the candidate lacks the knowledge required to support a persuasive argument. The presentation may be muddled or unclear, and the views of other writers may be seriously misunderstood or distorted.

0-39: An answer should be placed in this band if it fails to meet the criteria

for a higher mark: that is, if it fails to develop even a superficially effective response to the question.

10

Reading list for Evidence and Argument classes General and introductory There is no textbook as such for this course, but useful background readings for many of the topics can be found in the following three books:

• Stefan Berger et al. (eds.), Writing History: Theory and Practice (2003; second edition, 2010)

• Peter Claus and John Marriott, History: An Introduction to Theory, Method and Practice (2012; second edition, Abingdon, 2017)

• David Marsh and Gerry Stoker (eds.), Theory and Methods in Political Science (Basingstoke, 1995 and subsequent editions – most recently Vivien Lowndes, David Marsh, and Gerry Stoker (eds.), Theory and Methods in Political Science (fourth edition, Basingstoke, 2018))

Students may also wish to consult the following works on theories, methods, and concepts in History and Politics: History David Cannadine (ed.), What is History Now? (Basingstoke, 2002) Richard Evans, In Defence of History (1997; paperback edition, 2001) John Lewis Gaddis, The Landscape of History: How Historians Map the Past (Oxford, 2004) Ulinka Rublack (ed.), A Concise Companion to History (Oxford, 2011) Politics John Craig, ‘The emergence of politics as a taught discipline at universities in the United

Kingdom’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations, early view (2019) Bernard Crick, In Defence of Politics (1962 and subsequent editions) Russell Dalton, Citizen Politics: Public Opinion and Political Parties in Advanced Industrial

Democracies (Los Angeles, CA, 1996 and subsequent editions) Iain McLean, Public Choice: An Introduction (Oxford, 1987) Donatella della Porta and Michael Keating (eds.), Approaches and Methodologies in the

Social Sciences: A Pluralist Perspective (Cambridge, 2008) Alan Ryan, On Politics (2012)

11

Class 1 (MT Week 2). How to Think with Sources This class will introduce you to source analysis through close reading of a selection of primary sources spanning the seventeenth to twenty-first centuries. These sources will allow you to start thinking about how some of the core themes and concepts that will appear throughout the course vary across time and space. You will need to read each source carefully in preparation for the class, but do not need any wider contextual knowledge of the period in question (although it will be helpful to Google names and events if they are unfamiliar). The sources will form the basis for discussion in the seminar, so it is important that you have read them all. All sources are on available on Moodle. When completing your reading think about…

- What historical questions can (and can’t) we use these sources to answer? - Whose voice do we hear in the sources and whose are missing? What is the

perspective we are getting as historians? - What is the purpose of each source? Who are the intended audiences and what

mediums being used? - What do these sources tell us about relations of power? - What do they tell us about forms of resistance? - How can we track ideas across time and location?

Primary sources (available on Moodle)

1. Revocation of the Edict of Nantes, 22 October 1685 2. Escape Account by Marie de La Rochefoucauld, 10 January 1690 3. Declaration of Independence, 4 July 1776 4. Extract from: Frederick Douglass’ speech The Meaning of July Fourth for the Negro,

5 July 1852 5. Suffragette Penny, 1903 6. ‘Noisy tactics at Dundee: Mr Churchill rung down by a Suffragette’s bell’, Illustrated

London News, 9 May 1908 7. Representation of the People Act, UK Parliament, 6 February 1918 8. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 10 December 1948 9. Extract from: Kwame Nkrumah’s speech to the UN General Assembly, 23 September

1960 10. US Secretary of State Donald Rumsfeld in response to Al Jazeera reporter during

interview on Al Jazeera TV, 27 March 2003

12

Class 2 (MT Week 4). Using Archives and Manuscript Sources: British Education and the Politics of Comprehensivization, c. 1960-79 This exercise is an introduction to the ways in which political and social historians use archival sources to understand the past. It focusses on a range of documents – selected from various archival collections – that relate to the process of comprehensivization in British schools from the 1950s to the 1970s. Taken together they offer a sense of the forces that drove comprehensivization in England and Wales, the political debates that surrounded this process, and the reactions it provoked. Importantly, they ask us to think about the relationship between high and popular politics in shaping wide ranging social change. The final section in the bibliography suggests some further reading that reflects upon the methodological challenges and tensions within modern political history, and which will be important to understand when revising. All sources have been uploaded to the Evidence and Argument Moodle site. First, you should read the essential core secondary reading (marked * and also on Moodle), which provides useful context for understanding how and why educational reform unfolded as it did in the decades after 1945. The reading also includes a series of published primary texts, which illustrate how the debates and issues you see in the archival material appeared in public debate. You should read all the archival documents carefully and think about what they tell us about… 1. The timeline of comprehensivization? 2. Where demands for reform came from? 3. The party politics of educational reform? 4. What parents wanted from schools? 5. Reactions to the growth of comprehensive schools? More broadly, think about what are the strengths and limitations of these kinds of archival sources for studying recent political history? Where else might political historians look for sources to account for political and social change? Primary sources (in chronological order – all available on Moodle)

1. David Eccles, ‘Secondary Education’, 18 September 1956: The National Archives, ED147/636

2. Letter to Geoffrey Lloyd MP (Conservative) from Mrs Dorothy Olds, 20 September 1957 & Ministry of Education reply 22 October 1957: The National Archives, ED147/636

3. Research Services Ltd., Summary of survey of parents’ educational attitudes, November 1957: Churchill Archives Centre, Mark Abrams Papers, ABMS/364

4. Inequalities in education, Brian Simon speech to CASE conference, 1965: The Modern Records Centre, University of Warwick, Campaign for the Advancement of State Education [CASE] Papers, MSS.236/1982/98

5. Circular 10/65, Department of Education and Science, July 1965: The National Archives, ED147/827D

6. Conservative Party's Education Policy Group, ‘Secret: Conservative Education policy for the seventies’, July 1968: Churchill Archives Centre, Thatcher Papers, THCR 1/6/1

13

7. STEP, ‘So you still think the Eleven-plus is fair?’, November 1969: The Modern Records Centre, University of Warwick, Campaign for the Advancement of State Education [CASE] Papers, MSS.236/1982/94

8. C. B. Cox and A. E. Dyson, ‘Comment: letter to MPs’, introduction to ‘Fight for Education: A Black Paper’, Critical Survey, 4:1 (1969), 3-6

9. Circular 10/70, The Organisation of Secondary Education, Department of Education and Science, June 1970 (London: H.M.S.O., 1970): University of Cambridge Library

10. Department of Education and Science decision on comprehensive reorganisation of Isleworth Grammar School, 4 October 1973: Churchill Archives Centre, Thatcher Papers, THCR 1/6/3

11. Minute of Chequers meeting between Edward Heath (PM) and Margaret Thatcher (Secretary of State for Education) to discuss the Conservative government’s education policy, 12 Jan 1972: The National Archives, PREM 15/863

12. ‘National Union of Teachers conference: The Presidential Address’, given by Max Morris, 21 April 1973: Churchill Archives Centre, Thatcher Papers, THCR 1/6/2

13. Transcript of speech delivered by James Callaghan (PM) at Ruskin College, Oxford, 18 October 1976: Weston Library, University of Oxford, Callaghan Papers, uncatalogued

14. Statistics of education covering period 1945 to 1980 taken from annual report ‘Statistics in Education’, published by the Department for Education and Science & collated in B. Simon, Education and the social order, 2nd edition (1999), pp. 572-602

Core secondary reading *Edward Boyle, ‘The politics of secondary school reorganisation: some reflections’, Journal of Educational Administration and History, 4:2 (1972), 28-38 *Jon Lawrence, ‘Political history’, in Stefan Berger, Heiko Feldner, and Kevin Passmore (eds.), Writing History: Theory and Practice (second edition, 2010) *Gary McCulloch, ‘British Labour Party education policy and comprehensive education: From Learning to Live to Circular 10/65’, History of Education, 45:2 (2016), 225-45 *P. Mandler, 'Educating the Nation I: Schools’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society (2014) Further reading Published primary sources Olive Banks, Parity and prestige in English secondary education: a study in educational sociology (1955) Jean E. Floud, A. H. Halsey, & F. M. Martin, Social class and educational opportunity (1956) Brian Jackson & Dennis Marsden, Education and the Working Class (1962) Brian Cox et al (ed.), The Black Papers on education I-V (1969-77) Susan Crosland, Tony Crosland (1982) Michael Young, Rise of the Meritocracy (1958) R. A. B. Butler, The art of the possible: the memoirs of Lord Butler (1971) Anthony Crosland, The future of socialism (London, 1956), ch. 10 ‘The influence of education’ Edward Boyle, The Politics of Education: Edward Boyle and Anthony Crosland in conversation with Maurice Kogan (1971)

14

Caroline Benn & Brian Simon, Halfway there: report on the British comprehensive-school reform, 2nd edition (1972) Further secondary reading Stephen J. Ball, The Education Debate, 3rd edition (London, 2017) V. Brooks, 'The Role of External Examinations in the Making of Secondary Modern Schools in England 1945-65', History of Education (2008) R. McKibbin, Classes and Cultures: England 1918-1951 (1998), ch. 6 P. Mandler, 'Educating the Nation I-IV, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society (Sixth Series) (2014-17) [II – Universities (2015); III – Social Mobility (2016); IV – Subject Choice (2017)] B. Simon, Education and the Social Order 1940-1990, 2nd edition (1999), chs. 4, 6, 8, & 9 S. Todd, The People: The Rise and Fall of the Working Class, 1910-2010 (2014), ch. 10 ‘Golden Age of the Grammar School’ Laura Carter, ‘Experimental’ secondary modern education in Britain, 1948–1958’, Cultural and Social History, 13:1 (2016), 23-41 M. Francis, ‘A socialist policy for education?: Labour and the secondary school, 1945-51’, History of Education (1995) Nicholas Hillman, ‘The Public Schools Commission: “Impractical, Expensive and Harmful to Children”?’, Contemporary British History, 24:4 (2010), 511-31 A. Kerckhoff et al, Going Comprehensive in England and Wales: a study of uneven change (1996) G. O’Hara, Governing Post-war Britain: The Paradoxes of Progress, 1951-1973 (2012), chs. 9-10 N. Rao, ‘Labour and Education: Secondary Reorganisation and the Neighbourhood School’, Contemporary British History, 16:2 (2002), 99-120 D. Thom, ‘The 1944 Education Act; the “art of the possible”?’, in H. L. Smith, ed., War and social change: British society in the Second World War (1986) A. Wooldridge, Measuring the Mind: Education and Psychology in England, c.1860-c.1990 (1994) R. Waters, Thinking Black: Britain, 1964-1985, ch. 4 ‘Black Studies’ Useful summary papers of key themes Secondary Education and Social Change briefing papers: https://sesc.hist.cam.ac.uk/resources/ Reflections on modern British political history David M. Craig, “‘High Politics’ and the ‘New Political History’”, The Historical Journal, 53:2 (2010), 453-75 Susan Pederson, “What is political history now?” in David Cannadine (ed), What is History Now (2002) Philip Williamson, “Maurice Cowling and the writing of modern British political history”, in Robert Crowcroft, S. J. D. Green, and R. C. Whiting (eds.), The Philosophy, Politics and Religion of British Democracy: Maurice Cowling and Conservatism (2010) David Brown, Robert Crowcroft, & Gordon Pentland (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Modern British Political History, 1800-2000 (2018)

15

Class 3 (MT Week 6). Comparative History: Varieties of Nationalism in Asia and Africa This class provides an introduction to comparative history through a case study of the development of nationalism in Asia and Africa. The readings focus on the writings of nationalist leaders in four contexts – India (Gandhi, Tagore, Nehru), China (Mao), the Arab world (Nasser), and sub-Saharan Africa (Awolowo). You should prepare for the class by looking at the core readings marked with an asterisk below, and at least one or two of the primary sources marked with a dagger (†), and thinking about the questions below. Questions for presentation and discussion Each presenter should discuss one of the four cases (India, China, the Arab world, and sub-Saharan Africa) in the light of the following questions:

• What do the individual biographies tell us about the making of nationalism? • In what way was nationalism a critique of imperialism? • What were the visions of politics of the newly decolonized societies?

For discussion:

• Is nationalism ‘modular’? • How do we account for the rise of peasant nationalism? • In what way is popular culture significant for the making of national identity?

Reading list Core readings on nationalism *C.A. Bayly, The Birth of The Modern World, 1780-1914: Global Connections and Comparisons (Malden, MA, 2004), chapter 6 (‘Nation, empire and ethnicity’) – available on Moodle *John Breuilly (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of the History of Nationalism (Oxford, 2012), esp. introduction, ‘Anti-western doctrines of nationalism’ by Andreas Eckert, ‘Nationalisms in India, 1857-1947’ by Joya Chatterji, and ‘Nationalisms in the Arab world since 1945’ by Fred Halliday – available as an ebook Core readings on comparative and transnational history *Stefan Berger, ‘Comparative History’, in Stefan Berger, Heiko Feldner, and Kevin Passmore (eds.), Writing History: Theory and Practice (second edition, 2010) *C.A. Bayly, ‘World History’, in Ulinka Rublack (ed.) A Concise Companion to History (2011) *Richard Drayton, ‘Where does the world historian write from? Objectivity, moral conscience and the past and present of imperialism’, Journal of Contemporary History, 46 (2011) Further general reading Adrian Hastings, The Construction of Nationhood (Cambridge, 1997) – available as an ebook Cemil Ayadin, The Politics of Anti-Westernism in Asia (New York, NY, 2007), chapters 5-6. Vinayak Chaturvedi (ed.), Mapping Subaltern Studies and the Postcolonial (2000) Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on Nationalism (third edition, 2007)

16

Patricia Clavin, ‘Defining Transnationalism’, Contemporary European History 14 (2005) India †Rabindranath Tagore, Nationalism (1917) †M. K. Gandhi, Hind Swaraj, ed. by Anthony Parel (1909 and various editions) †Jawaharlal Nehru, The Discovery of India (1946), chapter 8 Craig Jeffrey, Modern India: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford, 2017) Barbara D. Metcalf and Thomas R. Metcalf, A Concise History of [Modern] India (Cambridge, 2001; second edition, 2006; third edition, 2012) Faisal Devji, The Impossible Indian: Gandhi and the Temptation of Violence (2012) Faisal Devji, ‘“Hind Swaraj” and Gandhi's thought’, Public Culture, 23 (2011) Benjamin Zachariah, Nehru (2004), chapters 2-3 China †Mao Zedong, ‘Report on an Investigation of the Peasant Movement In Hunan’ [1927] and ‘On New Democracy’ [1940], in Selected Works of Mao Tse-tung – available in various editions and online Rana Mitter, Modern China: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford, 2008; second edition, 2016) John King Fairbank and Merle Goldman, China: A New History (Cambridge, MA, 1992; enlarged edition, 1998; second enlarged edition, 2006) Joseph Esherick, ‘Ten Theses on the Chinese Revolution’, Modern China, 21 (1995) Rebecca Karl, Mao Zedong and China in the Twentieth-Century World: A Concise History (Durham, NC, 2010)

The Arab world †Gamal Abdel Nasser, Egypt’s Liberation: The Philosophy of the Revolution (Cairo and Washington, DC, 1955) James L. Gelvin, The Modern Middle East: A History (Oxford, second edition, 2008; third edition, 2011; fourth edition, 2015) Eugene Rogan, The Arabs: A History (2009; second edition, 2012) Sylvia G. Haim (ed.), Arab Nationalism: An Anthology (Berkeley, CA, 1962) Ziad Fahmy, Ordinary Egyptians: Creating the modern nation through popular culture (Stanford, CA, 2011) Sub-Saharan Africa †Obafemi Awolowo, Path to Nigerian Freedom (1947) John Parker and Richard Rathbone, African History: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford, 2007) Frederick Cooper, Africa since 1940 (Cambridge, 2002), chapters 4-6 E.S. Atieno Odhiambo and John Lonsdale (eds.), Mau Mau and Nationhood (Athens, OH, 2002), chapters 3, 6, 10 Further background reading suggestions can be found in relevant sections of the History Paper 23 reading list.

17

Class 4 (MT Week 8). Using Visual Sources: Political Cartoons This class will explore how we might use political cartoons as a source for understanding the development of democratic political behaviour since the eighteenth century. You should start with the core readings, look at some cartoons online, and think about the questions below. Questions for presentation and discussion What can political cartoons tell us about changing views of

1. Democracy and representative government? 2. Political parties? 3. Nations and national identity?

Each presenter should select three or four cartoons to illustrate their argument. For discussion:

• What can visual sources tell us about contemporaries’ views of political culture? • Do political cartoons require special methodological approaches? • How do historians and political scientists use cartoons, and other visual sources,

differently? • Can satire transcend national political contexts?

Primary sources There are thousands of political cartoons available on the internet. This list is just a starting-point, and students should feel free to search more widely. http://app.harpweek.com https://www.cartoonbank.com/ Proquest Historical Periodicals – available through iDiscover www.loc.gov/teachers/classroommaterials/primarysourcesets/political-cartoons/ https://www.brown.edu/academics/libraries/john-carter-brown/jcb-online/image-collections/political-cartoon-collection http://www.americanantiquarian.org/american-political-cartoons http://theweek.com/cartoons https://walpole.library.yale.edu/collections/prints-drawings-and-paintings Reading list Core reading on political cartoons *Tom Culbertson, ‘The Golden Age of American Political Cartoons’, Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era, 7 (2008) *Daniel Hammett, ‘Political Cartoons, Post-Colonialism, and African Studies’, Critical African Studies, 2 (2010) *Joan L. Conners, ‘Visual Representations of the 2004 Presidential Campaign: Political Cartoons and Popular Culture References’, American Behavioral Scientist, 49 (2005) *Juha Ridanpää, ‘Geopolitics of Humour: The Muhammad Crisis and the Kaltio Comic Strip Episode in Finland’, Geopolitics, 14 (2009)

18

Core reading on visual sources and cultural history *Peter Burke, Eyewitnessing: The Uses of Images as Historical Evidence (2001), esp. introduction and chapter 4 *Megan Vaughan, ‘Culture’ in Ulinka Rublack, ed., A Concise Companion to History (Oxford, 2011) *Peter Mandler, ‘The Problem with Cultural History’, Cultural and Social History 1 (2004) Further reading on political cartoons Diana Donald, The Age of Caricature: Satirical Prints in the Reign of George III (New Haven, CT, 1996) Stephen Hess and Sandy Northrop, Drawn and Quartered: The history of American political cartoons (Montgomery, AL, 1996) Fiona Deans Halloran, Thomas Nast: The Father of Modern Political Cartoons (Chapel Hill, NC, 2012) Robert Mann, Daisy Petals and Mushroom Clouds: LBJ, Barry Goldwater, and the Campaign Ad that Changed American Politics (Baton Rouge, LA, 2011) Patricia Gilmartin, ‘Still the Angel in the Household: Political Cartoons of Elizabeth Dole’s Presidential Campaign’, Women & Politics, 22 (2001) John W. Dower, War Without Mercy: Race and Power in the Pacific War (New York, NY, 1986), esp. (but not exclusively) pp. 181-200 – available as an ebook Christina Holtz-Bacha and Bengt Johansson (eds.), Election Posters Around the Globe: Political Campaigning in the Public Space (2017) Judith S. Trent, Robert V. Friedenberg and Robert E. Denton, Jr., Political Campaign Communication: Principles and Practices (eight editions, 1983-2015)

19

Class 5 (LT Week 2). Using Quantitative Sources: Occupational Structure and the Industrial Revolution Historians and political scientists use both qualitative and quantitative sources in their work. Quantitative sources provide information which can be expressed as one or more numbers. This has obvious benefits, but also comes with unique challenges. This class is based on a case study developed by Dr Sebastian Keibek, in which you are asked to look at several historical sources providing quantitative information, each with their own strengths and weaknesses. It does not require any special maths skills or knowledge of statistics, and all the sources mentioned below are available on Moodle. When economists and politicians discuss the state of today’s economy, they often talk in terms of GDP, a monetary measure of a country’s total economic output. Accurately calculating this number requires collecting large amounts of information from private firms and government departments, a task undertaken by national statistics offices. Direct information on the national economy in Britain in terms of outputs, that is, quantities and prices of goods and services produced, is scarce before the advent of national accounts in the 1940s. To study economic developments before the 1940s, the best available information is often not on what goods were produced in which quantities, but on who was involved in this production; in other words: on the composition of the labour force. Information on what individuals did for a living was often collected in official documents, particularly if those individuals were men. We can use this information to generate a picture of the composition of the labour force at certain moments in time. One way of expressing this in a quantitative way is to allocate individuals to occupational sectors. Such an allocation can be made at several degrees of precision, but for this case study we will limit ourselves to the highest level of abstraction, and divide the labour force in just three sectors: agriculture, manufacturing, and services. Economists often characterise the state of a country’s economic development in terms of these three sectors – as depicted in this stylised chart. The underlying idea is that in little-developed, low-income economies, the vast majority of people was/is engaged in agriculture, consuming almost all the food they produce(d) themselves, with only a limited surplus which they could/can trade for non-food essentials (such as clothing), and hardly any for luxury goods (e.g. interior decorations) or services (e.g. paid entertainment). In more developed economies, with higher household incomes, this surplus was/is larger, providing employment for a larger share of the population in manufacturing and, to a lesser degree, services. In wealthy Western economies today, incomes are so high that we can afford to spend a large share of it on services (such as a university education), whilst technology has greatly reduced the number of people working in manufacturing and agriculture – resulting in an occupational structure dominated by the service sector. All of this means that if we could reconstruct the occupational structure of a country or region at some moment in the past, this would give us information on the contemporary state of the economy, compared to some earlier or later time, or to some other country or region. Primary sources On Moodle, you will find a number of English historical sources which provide occupational information: 1. Returns from the 1851 census for the village of Allerthorpe. More information on this village can be found here. Censuses were taken every ten years, starting in 1801. The amount

20

and quality of occupational information collected improved over time, but only becomes really useful from 1841 for men, and from 1851 for men and women. As you will see, information was recorded per household. The word ‘do’ stands for ‘ditto’ and simply means that the information on the previous line should be repeated. 2. Gregory King’s social table of England and Wales for 1688. In 1696, King published his pamphlet on the ‘Natural and Political Observations and Conclusions upon the State and Condition of England’, which is one of the first attempts to ‘count’ the population and income of England and Wales. The so-called ‘social table’ in this pamphlet categorises the number and income of all English and Welsh households by social class for 1688, and has been used extensively by economic historians to estimate the composition of the labour force for that year. 3. The probate inventory of John Porter. Just like today, people in early modern Britain sometimes created a ‘last will and testament’, which stipulated how the inheritance should be divided when he/she died. To support the fair division of the inheritance, a so-called ‘probate inventory’ might also be drawn up after a person had died. Such a document provided a list of all material possessions (except real estate), with their estimated value. In the ‘header’ of the inventory (the preamble above the actual list of goods), the deceased was, if he was a man, typically identified not just by his name but also by his occupation – as is the case in this example. To allow the retrieval of these documents from the archives, indexes have over time been created, listing millions of documents, repeating much of the information from these headers. An example can be found here. 4. A transcript of the 1522 military survey for the county of Rutland. Similar surveys have survived for the town of Coventry and the Suffolk ‘hundred’ of Babergh. This survey was taken to create an estimate of England’s capacity to provide men, arms, and armour in times of war. Since the provision of arms and armour was linked to a person's wealth, with wealthy men being able to provide horses and expensive equipment, those surveyed had to provide a sworn valuation of their possessions. Similar survey returns exist for later moments in time, but this is the earliest useful example. Questions for presentation and discussion Study the four primary sources with the following questions in mind:

a. What type of occupational information do they provide? b. Can this information be easily characterised in sectoral terms (agriculture,

manufacturing, services)? c. How complete is the information, within the scope of the geographic entity covered

by the source? d. How easy would it be to obtain a reasonable impression of the contemporary

occupational structure of Britain as a whole on the basis of this type of source? What problems (incompleteness, vagueness, bias, etcetera) would have to be solved to achieve this?

e. Historians have used all of the above types of sources to reconstruct Britain’s historical occupational structure. A recent example is provided by Stephen Broadberry et al. in their study of British Economic Growth, 1270–1870 (Cambridge, CUP 2015). Read the journal article by Broadberry et al. (2013) – particularly pages 18 and 19, which deal with how they used the 1522 militia surveys and Gregory King’s social table – and critically evaluate their approach.

21

Each presenter should discuss questions a-d by reference to one of the prescribed sources. Reading list Core reading on occupational change *Stephen Broadberry, Bruce M.S. Campbell, and Bas van Leeuwen, ‘When did Britain industrialise? The sectoral distribution of the labour force and labour productivity in Britain, 1381–1851’, Explorations in Economic History, 50 (2013) – available on Moodle *Leigh Shaw-Taylor and E.A. Wrigley, ‘Occupational structure and population change’, in Roderick Floud, Jane Humphries and Paul Johnson (eds.), The Cambridge Economic History of Modern Britain (2 vols., Cambridge, 2014), I – available as an ebook *Edward Higgins and Amanda Wilkinson, ‘Women, occupations and work in the Victorian censuses revisited’, History Workshop Journal, 81 (2016) Core reading on economic history and quantification *Pat Hudson, ‘Economic history’, in Stefan Berger et al. (eds.), Writing History: Theory and Practice (second edition, 2010) *D.C. Coleman, ‘History, economic history and the numbers game’, Historical Journal, 38 (1995) Further reading Pat Hudson and Mina Ishizu, History by Numbers: An Introduction to Quantitative Approaches (second edition, Bloomsbury Academic, 2016) E.A. Wrigley, Continuity, Chance and Change: The Character of the Industrial Revolution in England (Cambridge, 1988) E.A. Wrigley, The Path to Sustained Growth: England’s Transformation from an Organic Economy to an Industrial Revolution (Cambridge, 2016) (For a short summary of Professor Wrigley’s views, see ‘Opening Pandora’s box: A new look at the industrial revolution’, Vox EU website, 22 July 2011, available online at http://voxeu.org/article/industrial-revolution-energy-revolution.) Julian Hoppit, ‘Understanding the industrial revolution’, Historical Journal, 30 (1987) David Cannadine, ‘The present and the past in the English industrial revolution, 1880-1980;, Past and Present, 103 (1984) Maxine Berg and Pat Hudson, ‘Rehabilitating the industrial revolution’, Economic History Review, 45 (1992) Nicholas Crafts, ‘The industrial revolution: Economic growth in Britain, 1700-1860’, ReFRESH, 4 (1987), available online at http://www.ehs.org.uk/dotAsset/15457c19-e7bd-4045-a056-30a3efac2d47.pdf Emma Griffin, A short history of the British industrial revolution (Basingstoke, 2010), chapters 2 and 5 Stephen Broadberry, Bruce M.S. Campbell, Alexander Klein, Mark Overton, and Bas van Leeuwen, British Economic Growth, 1270-1870 (Cambridge, 2015), esp. chapters 10 and 11.

22

Class 6 (LT Week 4). Studying Political Behaviour: Voting in UK General Elections This class will introduce students to the analysis of political behaviour through a case study of electoral behaviour in the UK and beyond. Students will evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of different theories of voting and examine how historians have applied social science methods to historical data. Questions for presentation and discussion How might the following theories of electoral behaviour be used to explain the results of recent British general elections?

1. Sociological – e.g. class politics (see esp. Clarke, Lawrence and Taylor, and Achen and Bartels)

2. Rational choice (see esp. Downs, Ansolabehere and Hay) 3. Valence – also known as competence or performance politics (see esp. Clarke and

Dalton ch. 10) For discussion:

• How might sociological and rational choice theories of electoral behaviour be used to explain the results of the 2010, 2015 and 2017 British general elections?

• Why have political scientists placed growing emphasis on ‘valence’ (or competence or performance) in recent years?

• What are the challenges involved in applying social science theories of voting to historical elections?

• Is social survey data more useful for answering some questions than others?

Reading list

Core reading *Harold D. Clarke et al., ‘Theories and models of voter support’, in Harold D. Clarke et al., Political Choice in Britain (Cambridge, 2004) – available as an ebook *Anthony Downs, An Economic Theory of Democracy (New York, NY, 1957), chapter 8 – the classic statement of the rational choice theory *Jon Lawrence and Miles Taylor, ‘Introduction: Electoral sociology and the historians’ in Jon Lawrence and Miles Taylor (eds.), Party, State and Society: Electoral Behaviour in Britain since 1820 (Aldershot, 1997) – available on Moodle *Stephen Ansolabehere, ‘Voters, candidates and parties’ in Donald A. Wittmann and Barry R. Weingast (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Political Economy (Oxford, 2008) – available as an ebook Political science literature on voting Christopher A. Achen and Larry M. Bartels, Democracy for Realists (Princeton, NJ, 2016), esp. chapter 9 – a recent defence of social groups as the main basis of political identities. Russell Dalton, Citizen Politics: Public Opinion and Political Parties in Advanced Industrial Democracies (sixth edition, Los Angeles, CA, 2014), esp. chapters 7-10 – leading US textbook with a comparative perspective Jocelyn A.J. Evans, Voters & Voting: An Introduction (2004)

23

Applications to recent UK general elections Colin Hay, The Political Economy of New Labour: Labouring under False Pretences? (Manchester, 1999), chapter 3 Ron Johnson and Charles Pattie, ‘Where did Labour’s votes go? Valence politics and campaign effects at the 2010 British general election’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 13 (2011) Edzia Carvalho and Kristi Winters, ‘“I went with what I always do…”: A qualitative analysis of “Cleggmania” and vote choice in the 2010 British general election’, Parliamentary Affairs, 68 (2015) Paul Whiteley et al., Affluence, Austerity and Electoral Change in Britain (Cambridge, 2013) Geoffrey Evans and James Tilley, The New Politics of Class: The Political Exclusion of the British Working Class (Oxford, 2017), chapters 7 and 8 Thomas Quinn, ‘Third-party strategy under plurality rule: The British Liberal Democrats and the New Zealand Social Credit Party’, Political Studies, 65 (2017) Further readings on UK general elections, 1997-2015 Anthony F. Heath et al., The Rise of New Labour: Party Policies and Voter Choices (Oxford, 2001) Geoffrey Evans and Pippa Norris (eds.), Critical Elections: British Parties and Voters in Long-Term Perspective (1999) Philip Cowley and Dennis Kavanagh, The British General Election of 2015 (Basingstoke, 2016) Andrew Geddes and Jonathan Tonge (eds.), Britain Votes 2015 (Oxford, 2015; also available as a supplement to Parliamentary Affairs, 68 (2015)) The 2017 general election Philip Cowley and Dennis Kavanagh, The British General Election of 2017 (2018) Jonathan Tonge et al. (eds.), Britain Votes 2017 (Oxford, 2018; also available as a supplement to Parliamentary Affairs, 71 (2018)) Nicholas Allen and John Bartle (eds.) None Past the Post: Britain at the Polls, 2017 (Manchester UP, 2018) Jonathan Mellon et al., ‘Brexit or Corbyn? Campaign and inter-election vote switching in the 2017 UK general election’, Parliamentary Affairs, 71 (2018) Will Jennings and Gerry Stoker, ‘The bifurcation of politics: Two Englands’, Political Quarterly, 87 (2016) Anna Sanders and Rosalind Shorrocks, ‘All in this together? Austerity and the gender-age gap in the 2015 and 2017 British general elections’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations, early view (2019) Historical approaches and applications Michael Childs, ‘Labour grows up: The electoral system, political generations, and British politics 1890-1929’, Twentieth Century British History, 6 (1995) Jürgen W. Falter, ‘The two Hindenburg elections of 1925 and 1932: A total reversal of voter coalitions’, Central European History, 23 (1990)

24

Class 7 (LT Week 6): Studying Political Institutions: Sociology, Public Policy, and Political Change This case study looks at three classic works of comparative sociology and political science, all of them associated with the ‘new institutionalism’, to explore how political scientists have used historical evidence to understand variations between countries and change over time:

*Theda Skocpol, ‘France, Russia, China: A structural analysis of social revolutions’, Comparative Studies in Society and History, 18 (1976) *Sven Steinmo, ‘Political institutions and tax policy in the United States, Sweden, and Britain’, World Politics, 41 (1989) *Paul Pierson, ‘The new politics of the welfare state’, World Politics, 48 (1996)

The authors develop their arguments at greater length in the following books: Theda Skocpol, States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia, and China (Cambridge, 1979; paperback edition, 2015) Sven Steinmo, Taxation and Democracy: Swedish, British and American Approaches to Financing the Welfare State (New Haven, 1993) Paul Pierson, Dismantling the Welfare State? Reagan, Thatcher, and the Politics of Retrenchment (Cambridge, 1994) Please read the three articles and think about the following questions:

• How have the authors chosen their cases for comparison, and what justification do they give for this?

• What sources have the authors drawn on to make their arguments? What are the strengths and limitations of these sources?

• What theories inform the comparisons which the authors are making? • What do the authors mean by ‘structures’ or ‘institutions’?

You should also read the following core works on institutionalism and its relationship with wider developments in the social sciences: *Sven Steinmo, ‘Historical institutionalism’, in Donatella della Porta and Michael Keating (eds.), Approaches and Methodologies in the Social Sciences: A Pluralist Perspective (Cambridge, 2008) *B. Guy Peters, Jon Pierre, and Desmond S. King, ‘The politics of path dependency: Political conflict in historical institutionalism’, The Journal of Politics, 67 (2005) *Bertell Ollman, ‘What is political science? What should it be?’, New Political Science, 22 (2000); available online at https://www.nyu.edu/projects/ollman/docs/what_poly_sci.php Further reading Jonathan Hopkin, ‘The comparative method’, in David Marsh and Gerry Stoker, Theory and Methods in Political Science (third edition, Basingstoke, 2010) or Matt Ryan, ‘The comparative method’, in Vivien Lowndes, David Marsh, and Gerry Stoker (eds.), Theory and Methods in Political Science (fourth edition, Basingstoke, 2018)

25

Vivian Lowndes, ‘The institutional approach’, in David Marsh and Gerry Stoker, Theory and Methods in Political Science (third edition, Basingstoke, 2010) or Vivien Lowndes, David Marsh, and Gerry Stoker (eds.), Theory and Methods in Political Science (fourth edition, Basingstoke, 2018) John Goldthorpe, ‘The uses of history in sociology: Reflections on some recent tendencies’, British Journal of Sociology, 42 (1991) Michael Mann, ‘In praise of macro-sociology: A reply to Goldthorpe’, British Journal of Sociology, 45 (1994) Peter Hall and Rosemary Taylor, ‘Political science and the three new institutionalisms’, Political Studies, 44 (1996) Kathleen Thelen, ‘Historical institutionalism in comparative politics’, Annual Review of Political Science, 2 (1999) Mark Blyth, ‘Structures do not come with an instruction sheet: Interests, ideas, and progress in political science’, Perspectives on Politics, 1 (2003) Alan M. Jacobs and R. Kent Weaver, ‘When policies undo themselves: Self-undermining feedback as a source of policy change’, Governance, 28 (2015) Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson, ‘Policy feedback in an age of polarization’, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 685 (2019) Class 8 (LT Week 8). Texts in Time: Studying the History of Political Thought The reading list for this class will follow in Lent Term.